Review bombing is an intentional attack (e.g. someone posts a story about a shitty restaurant owner and everyone on the internet starts leaving negative reviews for that restaurant even though they’ve never been there). Just getting negative reviews organically for being bad is not review bombing.
there’s probably no official definition, but you could argue it is supposed to refer to negative reviews that have nothing to do with the product. Like when a bunch of idiots gave Captain Marvel 1 star reviews because they hate Brie Larson.
Not going to lie, needing a PlayStation account feels pretty unrelated to the actual game to me. Akin to complaining about how something shipped on Amazon instead of, you know the actual product.
Your difficulties with needing a PlayStation account, like shipping, is going to wildly vary depending on location.
It means Sony won’t sell the game in countries where they don’t allow PSN accounts.
Their servers suck ass. I’m literally unable to play this game, even if I wanted to, because I get one generic server error after another when trying to make an account. This is the same reason it was originally removed from Helldivers 2.
Sony has a horrific track record of data breaches.
They’re collecting and selling data about you for profit.
Its a completely arbitrary and anti-consumer requirement that has zero benefits to you as the consumer.
It means Sony won’t sell the game in countries where they don’t allow PSN accounts.
That isn’t a problem for all the users that review the game though.
Their servers suck ass. I’m literally unable to play this game, even if I wanted to, because I get one generic server error after another when trying to make an account. This is the same reason it was originally removed from Helldivers 2.
I don’t know about that since I have never connected my PSN account. The only game I own which supports it is Ghost of Tsushima and I haven’t connected my account to that game.
Sony has a horrific track record of data breaches.
They’re collecting and selling data about you for profit.
Its a completely arbitrary and anti-consumer requirement that has zero benefits to you as the consumer.
Fair enough but I don’t think it’s actively anti consumer, I place that bar higher than this.
Publishers are trying to exclude “review bombing” because they think it’s just social manipulation, while just casually ignoring that there are actual problems with the game. Review bombing used to be something else, but now be wary of it because it’s usually them just trying to discredit actual concerns.
You can have actual concerns without abusing the review function, though. If you don’t own and never planned to play the game and are “reviewing” it because something on the internet made you angry, then that just discredits the actual review platform as a whole.
Reviews should be an actual review, not a tweet reply. If you haven’t actually played the game, don’t review it.
Sure - problem is that publishers are not making that distinction and calling any mass negative review (like a bad release, or game crashing bug) “review bombing”.
It’s not review bombing when there’s a legitimate problem!
Is it not? What is “review bombing”? I thought it was just when a bunch of negative reviews were submitted in a short period of time.
Review bombing is an intentional attack (e.g. someone posts a story about a shitty restaurant owner and everyone on the internet starts leaving negative reviews for that restaurant even though they’ve never been there). Just getting negative reviews organically for being bad is not review bombing.
If a bunch of people are intentionally buying the game, reviewing and refunding without playing it, isn’t that the same?
If they’re reviewing it negatively and then enjoying the game without refunding, I’ve gotta laugh.
there’s probably no official definition, but you could argue it is supposed to refer to negative reviews that have nothing to do with the product. Like when a bunch of idiots gave Captain Marvel 1 star reviews because they hate Brie Larson.
This is how I assume it would be used, but some people use it to mean “this got a lot of negative reviews right away”
Not going to lie, needing a PlayStation account feels pretty unrelated to the actual game to me. Akin to complaining about how something shipped on Amazon instead of, you know the actual product.
Your difficulties with needing a PlayStation account, like shipping, is going to wildly vary depending on location.
It is a hard requirement and thus part of the experience.
How much of a problem is it really though?
I don’t like it but eh.
Its a huge problem, for a variety of reasons.
It means Sony won’t sell the game in countries where they don’t allow PSN accounts.
Their servers suck ass. I’m literally unable to play this game, even if I wanted to, because I get one generic server error after another when trying to make an account. This is the same reason it was originally removed from Helldivers 2.
Sony has a horrific track record of data breaches.
They’re collecting and selling data about you for profit.
Its a completely arbitrary and anti-consumer requirement that has zero benefits to you as the consumer.
That isn’t a problem for all the users that review the game though.
I don’t know about that since I have never connected my PSN account. The only game I own which supports it is Ghost of Tsushima and I haven’t connected my account to that game.
Fair enough but I don’t think it’s actively anti consumer, I place that bar higher than this.
I’m not gay but i still support gay people and dislike people who hate them.
I mean it’s definitely not user-friendly
That’s true. It’s not user-friendly or pro-consumer.
For my own personal amusement, what else would they have to do to meet the level your personal anti-consumer bar is set at?
I was referring to their last point.
About it being completely arbitrary and anti-consumer? It 100% is.
Publishers are trying to exclude “review bombing” because they think it’s just social manipulation, while just casually ignoring that there are actual problems with the game. Review bombing used to be something else, but now be wary of it because it’s usually them just trying to discredit actual concerns.
You can have actual concerns without abusing the review function, though. If you don’t own and never planned to play the game and are “reviewing” it because something on the internet made you angry, then that just discredits the actual review platform as a whole.
Reviews should be an actual review, not a tweet reply. If you haven’t actually played the game, don’t review it.
Sure - problem is that publishers are not making that distinction and calling any mass negative review (like a bad release, or game crashing bug) “review bombing”.
How much of a problem it is will vary by how much it impacts and upsets a customer. For you, sounds like it’s not that big of an issue.
But the fact that they pulled out the “review bombing” exscuse means that it qualifies as a problem to a significant percentage of customers.